Girty’s Run Flood Control Alternatives Analysis
Team: RRDA Consulting4/15/19
Our Team
● Benjamin Grunauer
● Luke Piotrowicz
● Kaylie Jones
● Robert Cornwall
● Angela Urban
● Liam Gillen-Hughes
● Nick Panchik
● Dylan Margolis
➔ Water Resources
➔ Water Resources
➔ Environmental
➔ Transportation
➔ Transportation
➔ Geotechnical
➔ Construction Management
➔ Construction Management
Agenda
● Problem Statement
● Approach & Project Scope
● Watershed Study & Overview
● Alternatives Analysis
● Recommendations
● Summary
● Q&A
What’s the Problem?
Event/Date Description
1930s-40s Major Flooding
1936 21’ above flood stage
1937 ~10’ above flood stage
1972 7 day rainfall; Allegheny River back-
up
1973-74 Army Corps “flood control project”
2004 100-year hurricane
2007 25-year storm 2-hour rainfall
Army Corps dredging of Girty’s Run
2018 12 day rainfall > 0.01”
Girty’s Run Watershed Ordinances
● Millvale’s Annual Budget
○ $2,000 towards stormwater management
○ $50,000 towards engineering
● Millvale 2015 Floodplain Ordinance
○ Restricts new construction in the floodplain
● Upstream Stormwater Ordinances
○ Ross & Shaler Townships
○ New developments must collect 110% of rainwater
Approach & Project Scope
Client: Girty’s Run Watershed Association & Millvale
Community● Watershed Study
○ Hydrology, Water Resources, & Hydraulics
● Alternatives Analysis
○ Via discussions, research, meetings, & field visits
○ Preliminary Engineering and Design
● Summary Report & Recommendations
Alternatives Analysis Criteria
Evaluated alternatives based on:
● Project Cost
● Public Approval
● Constructability
● Maintenance & Risk
● Flood Mitigation
● Sustainability
Incorporating Sustainability
● Three pillars of Sustainability
○ Environmental
○ Social
○ Economic
Watershed Study & Overview
Girty’s Run & Tributaries
Girty’s Run Watershed
Focus: Millvale is in flood threatened area
~75% of watershed is built-up and impervious
Topography of Millvale Area
● Highest point: 910 ft msl
● Downtown Millvale: 700 ft msl
● Deep Valley
● Steep Walls
● Vulnerable Position
● Upstream conditions are similar
*Contour Density Map created with ArcGIS
Watershed Soil Conditions
● Numerous types of soil
● 75% of applicable area was rated:○ Poor drainage conditions○ Susceptible to erosion○ Weak loading capability
● Complications for earthmoving activities○ Projects would need a foreign
source
Field Investigations
● Surveyed channel surroundings
● Evaluated channel conditions
● Gathered public opinion from businesses and residents
Multiple investigations during late January & early February
Right: Example of channel emerging from under buildings
Top: Beginning of Girty’s Run ~6mi upstream
Right: Girty’s Run outlet into Allegheny River
Left: Channel section through Millvale
Right: Failed wall in channel
Girty’s Run & Millvale
● Sewer/Storm Outfalls (Green Circles)○ 5 surveyed in central Millvale○ 563 total in Girty’s Run
Watershed ● Green Stormwater Infrastructure
○ 39 Rain Barrels○ 2 Water Cisterns (Blue Boxes)○ 2 Major Rain Gardens○ 2 Major Bioswales EPA Classification:
“Impaired Waters”
Recent Media Attention: July 4th-5th, 2018 Storm
● Storm cells can be isolated and amorphous
● Flash flooding occurred in Millvale
Storm Data
● Limited precipitation data○ No reliable rain gages
within the watershed○ RADAR only
● Area is particularly sensitive ○ Storm curve density
● Increased intensity over time due to climate variability○ 2018 - record rainfall
Average recurrence
interval (years)
Girty’s Run Stage & Flow
● Staff gauge begins at the bottom of the
channel (1.5 ft below streambed)
○ Gauge height is indicative to “levels of
action”
■ Different from the exact water
height
○ Grant Avenue Bridge
■ Right after Route 28 interchange
Storms & Flooding
● Girty’s Run overflows at 1400
cfs
○ (BLACK LINE - see figure)
● Overflows have occurred almost
yearly within the past decade
Storms of concern
Short duration, high intensity
Ex: 2.5” over 1 hour
● Composite Trapezoidal & Rectangular Channel
● 1.75 miles through Millvale
● Width: 25 ft | Height: 11 ft
○ Negligible refuse
○ In-Situ average of 1.5ft of sediment & rock
■ Reduces cross section - accounted for in
hydraulic analysis
● Channel Roughness: 0.041 (Manning’s Coefficient)
● Channel Slope: 41 ft per mile (Elevation Change)
(Derived from Army Corps, USGS, & Field Survey)
Typical Channel & Floodplain
Actual Water Depth:Action Stage:Flood Stage:
Current Conditions
Current Conditions● Channel improvement completion (1980)
○ Deepened channel
○ Added gabions
● With no action
○ Channel Walls Failing
○ Channel continuously filling with
sediment
● Decreased capacity of channel
○ Increased severity of floods
○ Increased frequency of floods
No Action
Damages, Cleanup, & Economic Analysis
Cost Analysis completed based on Army Corps’ Report
● 100 year flood event
○ Hurricane Ivan (2004)
■ Estimated cost of $14.3 million
● About 400 private homes affected
● About 200 businesses affected
● 25 year flood event
○ Estimated Cost - $7.8 million
● Average Annual Damages in Millvale is $1.94 million
Alternatives Analysis
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Upstream Detention Basin ● Ross & Shaler Townships, North Hills
Area
● Detention Pond(s) near Babcock Blvd
○ Large singular or series of system(s)
○ Contains critical points near Girty’s
run
● Presence of large cliffs
○ Excess of 70 feet
○ Not feasible to place detention ponds
Upstream Detention Basin
● Ross Township has a new land
development plan
○ 6 miles upstream of Millvale
■ Roughly 7.2 acres of development
Upstream Detention Basin
● Designing in accordance with the Pennsylvania Stormwater BMP Manual○ Using the rational formula○ 2 year storm event
QPost = (1.18 in/hr)*(0.9)*(7.2 acres) - QPre
QPost = 6 cfs
● Impactful peak discharge reduction requires much larger catchment area
Upstream Detention Basin
● Using entire stream segment of 1.3 mi2
● QPost = (1.18 in/hr)*(0.6)*(832 acres)
○ 590 cfs
○ 25% reduction
● Issue to acquire land
● USDA rated soil conditions poorly for
development
● Millvale is prone to isolated high intensity
storms
○ Missing catchment area
● Total Cost Estimate: $1.6 Million
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin
2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Channel Widening
● Used Manning’s Equation to design new channel width
○ Capacity of 2,400 cfs (moderate flood stage)
○ Same Water Depth of 9.5 ft
● Calculated a new width of 34 ft
○ Average 9 ft increase in width throughout Millvale
● Channel shape remains same
○ Trapezoidal and rectangular
25 ft
Proposed DesignImproved Channel Design (1980)
Total Width = 34 ftTotal Width = 25 ft
6 ft 13 ft 6 ft
4.5 ft4.5 ft
Hydraulics of Widened Channel
● Flood Stage (9.5ft)
○ Before: 1400 cfs
○ After: 2400 cfs
■ 71% Increase
● Action Stage (6.5 ft)
○ Before: 1000 cfs
○ After: 1500 cfs
■ 50% increase
Channel Widening Cost Analysis
● Required Property Acquisition
○ Total: $8 Million to purchase
necessary properties
● Culvert Widening
○ 12 culverts would need to be
widened along the channel
○ Similar PennDOT projects cost
about $850,000 per culvert
○ Total: $10.2 Million
● Approximately 1,200 ft underground
○ Road reconstruction cost
estimated at $125,000
○ Cost of earth work $3 Million
● Total Cost: $21 Million
○ Using the Average Annual
damages of $1.94 million
Channel Widening
● Future Work
○ Utility Relocation
○ Negatively Impact Millvale during construction
■ Construction would be lengthy
■ Many roadways would be closed during construction
○ Public opinion
■ Eminent Domain
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening
3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Diversion Channel ● Location(NE Border along Evergreen
Rd): Pictured
○ Channel is located in open
wooded area
○ Property purchases are minimal
● Channel Design
○ Additional Capacity: 1,000 cfs
○ 9 ft wide
○ 9.5 ft deep
○ 2,400 ft long
○ Concrete walls
Diversion Channel
● Topography Concern○ Construction of the channel would require
extreme earthwork
○ Slope stability concerns - erosive soil
○ Elevation along hillside ranges from 800 to
910 ft
○ Ideal elevation for diversion channel is 745 ft
Box Culvert Diversion Channel
● Specifications
○ Under Evergreen Rd at the same
elevation of the existing channel
○ 9 ft wide by 9.5 ft deep
○ 3,200 ft in length
● Constructability concerns
○ Excavation of a minimum of 55 ft of
soil
○ Highway Closure
Box Culvert Diversion Channel Cost
Road Demolition - $320,000
Excavation and Backfill- $53 million
Box Culvert - $5.4 million
Road Construction - $2.5 million
TOTAL COST - $61.2 million
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel
4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Full Channel Dredging● Methods
○ Cutterhead pipeline dredges
○ Mechanical dredges
● Resulting in increased channel
capacity
○ Average of 2.5 feet of sediment
build up
○ Stage height increase of 1.5
feet
○ Additional 350 cfs of capacity
during flood stage
Breakdown of Dredging Costs
Extent of
Dredging
Volume of Silt
(ft3)Dredging Dewatering/Disposal Cost
Entire
Channel
45,000 $1,900,000 $100,000 $2,000,000
Upstream
Half
18,650 $650,000 $40,000 $690,000
Downstream
Half
26,250 $900,000 $50,000 $950,000
*Based on a complete dredging of the channel performed in 2007
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging
5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Reservoir/Dam Structure ● Designed by Army Corps of Engineers in 1970
○ Location: Intersection of Evergreen Rd and
Babcock Blvd
○ Height: 115 ft Length: 1000 ft
○ Earthen Dam
○ Create a lake of 100 acres
■ Providing 3140 ac-ft of Storage
■ Provide flood mitigation
● Issues
■ Residences and commercial structures
■ Highway relocation
Alternatives1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure
6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades7. Green Street Initiatives
Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades
Comprehensive Watershed Survey
● Numerous field
surveys with
equipment
● Additional rain
gauge
implementation
Annual Maintenance Plan
● Localized
Dredging
● Routine channel
structure
inspections and
repairs
Emergency Management
● Upgraded
warning system
● Flood detour
route
Upgraded Flood Warning System Plan
● Siren System already in place
○ One Siren - use precautions
○ Two Sirens - floods occuring
● Connect system to staff gauge and send warnings to locations (0.5 ft prior)
○ Continuous staff gauge sensor
Gauge
Height (ft)
11 15.8 16 18 18.6 21
Water
Location
Gazebo
Garden
Lincoln
Ave
Grant St
bridge
deck
top of staff
gauge
upper
parking lot
line on
Grant St
(Hurricane
Ivan)
Flood Detour
● Allow safe travels around
Millvale
● Sign Type
○ Variable
○ Temporary
■ Signs placed during
emergency
management plan
Trip Duration
● 22 min - 35 min
○ Depending
on time of
day
Repairs
● Field Identified areas of concern
Localized Dredging ● Target heavy sediment areas to reduce buildup
○ Bypasses maneuvering costs
● From Evergreen Ave to 50 ft
before Freemont St
● 18,750 ft^3 of silt accumulated
● Average silt build-up of 1 ft
● Several areas warrant concern
Upstream
● 20 ft before Freemont St to
Sheridan St
● 26,250 ft^3 of silt accumulated
● Average silt build-up of 2 ft
● Primary target for dredging
Channel Bottom
Downstream
Maintenance & Management Plan Budget
● One time
○ Signs - Total Cost of $3,900
○ Watershed survey - $1,000
○ Gauge sensor $4,000
● Recurring
○ Dredging
■ 2,500 cu ft per year
■ $140,000
○ Repairs
■ $2,000 to fix 100 sq ft area
○ Inspection
■ $1,000
● Total Annual Budget: $143,000 per year
Alternatives
1. Upstream Detention Basin2. Channel Widening3. Diversion Channel4. Full Channel Dredging5. Reservoir/Dam Structure6. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades
7. Green Street Initiatives
What Are Green Streets?
● Wide variety of green infrastructure:
○ Street Trees
○ Rain Gardens and
Bioswales
○ Permeable Pavement
● Impervious Surface Reduction
● Improved Sidewalk Drainage
What is Green Infrastructure?
Vegetation
Soil
Engineered
Systems
Reduce peak
stormwater
flows
Slow, filter,
& cleanse
runoff
Increase
Infiltration
Case Study: Etna Borough
● Etna Green StreetScape
○ 2 Street Phases
○ 1 Rain Garden
● Completed 2016-2017
● Manages ~1.25 acres of
impervious surface area
● Manages 16.8 MG/yr of runoff
Millvale Green Streets Plan: 2015
● 2015 EcoDistrict Pivot Plan
● Incorporated Complete Streets, Green Stormwater
Infrastructure, and Creekside Park
Green Streets
● North Ave. &
Grant Ave.
● Main Business
Corridor
● Existing
Green Spaces
Current Street Conditions
● Grant Ave:
○ Street Width = 32 ft
○ Sidewalk Width = 9 ft
● North Ave:
○ Street Width = 32.5 ft
○ Sidewalk Width = 9 ft
● Single Pour Concrete Sidewalks
● ADA Compliant Crosswalks
Green Streets Alternative
● Improved Sidewalk
Drain Network
● Street Trees
● Downspout
Disconnections
● Rain Gardens
Sidewalk Drainage Cross Section
● Cross-section runs whole length
○ Drainage slope: 0.004 ft/ft
○ 4 ft buffer to building facade
● Sidewalk slopes 2% to drain
● CU Structural Soil, R-Tanks, and
Impermeable Geotextile
Membrane
Modular Plastic Stormwater Units (R-Tanks)
CU Structural Soil
Sidewalk Drainage Cross Section
● Total 40” Depth
○ 6” Sidewalk Layer/Drain
Opening
○ 18” CU Structural Soil
○ 10” Bottom Stormwater
Units
○ Impermeable Geotextile
Membrane surrounding
Modular Plastic Stormwater Units (R-Tanks)CU Structural Soil
Street Trees
● Spacing Guidelines
○ 25 ft from intersection
○ 20 ft or more between
trees
○ Standard Tree Well =
4 ft x6ft
● 40 ft between trees
● 40 Tree Wells Total
CU Structural Soil
● Gravel Soil Mix to support tree
growth and provide sub-base for
pavements
● Highly porous to accommodate root
growth and water infiltration
● Can be compacted to meet load-
bearing requirements
Rain Garden Locations
McCarthy Park
Grant Ave. Pocket Park
● Phase 1 (RED)
○ Westbound on Grant Ave.
● Phase 2 (BLUE)○ NorthBound on North
Ave.
● Phase 3 (GREEN)○ Southbound on North
Ave.
● Phase 4 (BLACK)○ Eastbound on Grant Ave.
Green Street Alternative Construction
Phase Schedule
● Crews will work on a tight timeline completing work behind each other
● Phase Duration: 2 weeks● Total Project Duration: 8 weeks
Phase 1 & 4 - Blue
Phase 2- Black
Phase 3- Red● 2 travel lanes and 2 parking lanes
● Closed parking lane on side closest
to construction○ Staging area
● Closed travel lane on side closest
to construction○ Temporary walkway for pedestrians
○ Barrier protection
Detour Routes
Project Estimate
Etna Green Streetscape Phase 1
$475,000
● 4,776 ft2 of sidewalk
● 12 street trees
● 2,300 ft3 underground
storage
● 3,900 ft2 pervious
pavers
Millvale Green Streets
$950,000
● 9,040 ft2 of sidewalk
● 40 street trees
● 4,400 ft3 excavation
and underground
storage
● 2 Rain Gardens
Project Funding
● Etna Streetscape funded by…
○ PA DEP Growing Greener grant
■ PA state funds for addressing environmental concerns
○ US EPA Section 319 grant
■ Nonpoint source management program for the Clean Water Act
○ 3 Rivers Wet Weather grant
■ Non-profit environmental organization
Analysis Comparison
Alternatives
1. No Action2. Upstream Detention Basin3. Channel Widening4. Diversion Channel5. Full Channel Dredging6. Reservoir/Dam Structure7. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades8. Green Street Initiatives
BEST
WORST
Recommendations
Our Top Alternatives:
1. Maintenance & Management Plan Upgrades
2. Green Street Initiatives
3. Full Channel Dredging
● Final Report will be submitted to GRWA & Millvale Community
● Utilize our analysis to make decisions on future projects that mitigate
flooding
Thank you!
Zaheen Hussain - Millvale Sustainability Coordinator
Donna Pearson & Alexis Boytim - Girty’s Run Watershed Association
John Darnley - National Weather Service
Sara Woida, Patricia Kitchen, & Joe Delucia - US Army Corps of Engineers
Werner Loehlein & John Sebastian - Faculty Mentor
Questions?